Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Surely the reason LAB’s not pulling away in the polls is that

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited January 22 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Surely the reason LAB’s not pulling away in the polls is that Corbyn’s out of line from his voters on Brexit

I am heartbroken to have decided to leave @UKLabour. I am bitterly disappointed Labour are not officially opposing the insanity of #Brexit. I cannot support a pro Brexit party. If we have a general election, I will vote for a #Remain candidate. #WATON #WeAreTheOppositionNow

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 883
    edited January 22
    I reckon this is wishful thinking.

    I saw Corbyn live on his summer marginals tour. He delivered his stump speech, finely polished by the general election campaign. I lost count of mentions of the NHS. I didn't hear a single mention of Brexit. It's peripheral to his vision and priorities, and far too complicated for him to get bogged down in.

    I wish it was true, but until Labour starts tanking in the polls with councillors defecting over Brexit, I just don't see it.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    At the end of the day, Labour voters are much more interested in what Corbyn has to say on public spending, nationalisation and his brand of socialism than anything that he says about Brexit. As an issue Brexit doesn't seem to rate for Labour voters. The trendy urbanites that are supporting Corbyn want nationalised railways and more NHS spending more than they want to stay in the EU or single market. If it wasn't true then the Lib Dems would be doing a lot better at capturing remain voters from Labour.

    If anything Brexit is (as it has always been) a Tory issue. It rates higher than every subject for members and voters in Tory ranks. It is the subject on everyone's minds and will stay that way until we've left in 2019.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,944
    It's not just about going for what your voters want though. it's about what happens to people not voting for you currently as well. If they drive people to being more active voting against you, then it could still result in a net overall loss.

    Also, is the position itself possible? staying in the single market might be attractive to voters to start, but then the negatives would also be highlighted. It'sa fluid position in the eyes of voters.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    Not really. To make that argument, you have to assume that many current Tory voters would vote Lab if Labour became more pro-EU, which seems counterintuitive.

    I suppose there is the Lib Dem share to go at but that must be close to core at the moment. Likewise, there's a chance of taking some support from the SNP, though again, is Brexit really the deal-breaker there?

    The problem is not Corbyn's EU policy; it's the rest of them.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,427
    "n the previous post Don Brind raised what is a mystery of current polling – that LAB is only just level pegging with the Conservatives who on the face of it should be taking a pasting. However bad it gets for TMay it seems that her team remains on about 40% with Labour there or thereabouts."

    Almost all governments maintain their popularity for several months after an election. In 2010 it was two years, in 1992 it was about seven months, ended by the omnishambles and Back Wednesday respectively.

    Only once we get in 2019 will Labour's polling position come under too much scrutiny.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789

    It's not just about going for what your voters want though. it's about what happens to people not voting for you currently as well. If they drive people to being more active voting against you, then it could still result in a net overall loss.

    Also, is the position itself possible? staying in the single market might be attractive to voters to start, but then the negatives would also be highlighted. It'sa fluid position in the eyes of voters.

    Any position is possible as long as you don't have to actually deliver on it. That's the supreme advantage that Labour currently has.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,479
    MaxPB said:

    If anything Brexit is (as it has always been) a Tory issue. It rates higher than every subject for members and voters in Tory ranks. It is the subject on everyone's minds and will stay that way until we've left in 2019.

    Assuming we leave we'll just have a standstill transition deal at first while negotiations carry on. How will that bring any political closure?
  • notmenotme Posts: 2,452
    Corbyn and Mcdonell know that their economic plans would not be possible as members of the single market. You cannot just take into public ownership areas of the economy that are open to cross market competition.

    That of course does not prevent a future government from having a state owned railway operating company or a state owned electricity system. But it would need to be for franchises and contracts like everyone else and it must do it on no taxpayer subsidy (that is not made available to all).
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,362
    tpfkar said:

    I reckon this is wishful thinking.

    I saw Corbyn live on his summer marginals tour. He delivered his stump speech, finely polished by the general election campaign. I lost count of mentions of the NHS. I didn't hear a single mention of Brexit. It's peripheral to his vision and priorities, and far too complicated for him to get bogged down in.

    I wish it was true, but until Labour starts tanking in the polls with councillors defecting over Brexit, I just don't see it.

    Indeed. If anyone wants confirmation that people will vote Labour despite a Brexit positioning I suggest that they look up the GE2017 result in Vauxhall.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    MaxPB said:

    At the end of the day, Labour voters are much more interested in what Corbyn has to say on public spending, nationalisation and his brand of socialism than anything that he says about Brexit. As an issue Brexit doesn't seem to rate for Labour voters. The trendy urbanites that are supporting Corbyn want nationalised railways and more NHS spending more than they want to stay in the EU or single market. If it wasn't true then the Lib Dems would be doing a lot better at capturing remain voters from Labour.

    If anything Brexit is (as it has always been) a Tory issue. It rates higher than every subject for members and voters in Tory ranks. It is the subject on everyone's minds and will stay that way until we've left in 2019.

    There's probably a set of ex-Tory voters who switched to Labour over Brexit, and who may now be tempted to back the Lib Dems. But, it's likely to be a small set of voters.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237

    MaxPB said:

    If anything Brexit is (as it has always been) a Tory issue. It rates higher than every subject for members and voters in Tory ranks. It is the subject on everyone's minds and will stay that way until we've left in 2019.

    Assuming we leave we'll just have a standstill transition deal at first while negotiations carry on. How will that bring any political closure?
    Because we'll be officially out. Something you still don't understand. Any transition deal will be exactly that, transitional.

    Anyway, I don't see the point of discussing this any further with you given how EUfanatical you are.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    Sean_F said:

    MaxPB said:

    At the end of the day, Labour voters are much more interested in what Corbyn has to say on public spending, nationalisation and his brand of socialism than anything that he says about Brexit. As an issue Brexit doesn't seem to rate for Labour voters. The trendy urbanites that are supporting Corbyn want nationalised railways and more NHS spending more than they want to stay in the EU or single market. If it wasn't true then the Lib Dems would be doing a lot better at capturing remain voters from Labour.

    If anything Brexit is (as it has always been) a Tory issue. It rates higher than every subject for members and voters in Tory ranks. It is the subject on everyone's minds and will stay that way until we've left in 2019.

    There's probably a set of ex-Tory voters who switched to Labour over Brexit, and who may now be tempted to back the Lib Dems. But, it's likely to be a small set of voters.
    Yes, maybe around West and South West London as well as in Oxfordshire and some parts of the London commuter belt. The issue is that the Lib Dems are too stupid to take advantage of that and seem more interested in trying to rerun the vote rather than actually win seats in Parliament for 2022.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 901
    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.
  • Corbyn HAS a line?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    It seems rather odd for a GE2017 Labour supporter to start complaining now about Corbyn's position on Brexit; the time for that was when it could have made any difference, i.e. before and during the referendum campaign, or when considering who to vote for in GE2017.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395
    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    No, Brexit is not the reason. Why would anti Brexiteers go to the Tories? Commentators really should stop being so obsessed with Brexit and seeing everything through the prism of Remoanism.

    If Labour were to embrace the Single Market -and Freedom of Movement -then it would lose many working class votes.

    No the reason why Labour is not pulling ahead is for old traditional pre Brexit reasons.

    The ONLY way that Labour can pull further ahead is for them to take votes from the Tories, and the reason why it doesnt do so is because Corbyn and McDonnell are on the hard Marxist left. Corbyn cant win Middle England marginals voters.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    edited January 22
    kyf_100 said:

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    No, I think you are wrong. For the few remain Tories who switched to Labour, there seems to be nothing more than remaining in the EU. If it means economic suicide by Corbyn they will vote for it. So many of them are wedded to the EU, I'm personally not bothered if they ever come back to our party. Voting for Corbyn in 2017 is the ultimate betrayal of our party and tbh, they've made their bed and rate loyalty to the EU above loyalty to the party and country.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 901
    MaxPB said:

    kyf_100 said:

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    No, I think you are wrong. For the few remain Tories who switched to Labour, there seems to be nothing more than remaining in the EU. If it means economic suicide by Corbyn they will vote for it. So many of them are wedded to the EU, I'm personally not bothered if they ever come back to our party. Voting for Corbyn in 2017 is the ultimate betrayal of our party and tbh, they've made their bed and rate loyalty to the EU above loyalty to the party and country.
    What a terrifying thought. *Looks at one way flights out of the country*.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395
    MaxPB said:

    kyf_100 said:

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    No, I think you are wrong. For the few remain Tories who switched to Labour, there seems to be nothing more than remaining in the EU. If it means economic suicide by Corbyn they will vote for it. So many of them are wedded to the EU, I'm personally not bothered if they ever come back to our party. Voting for Corbyn in 2017 is the ultimate betrayal of our party and tbh, they've made their bed and rate loyalty to the EU above loyalty to the party and country.
    Yes, I really cannot understand how any Tory, no matter how pro-EU, could consider voting for Corbyn, especially as Corbyn's Labour is clearly EU-ambivalent, at best.

    It means that the EU has become a religion for them, a shibboleth, and they would rather see the UK run by anti-Semitic, quasi-Islamist, Stalin-loving, bank-nationalising, IRA-sympathising, idiot Marxist ideologues, who will ruin the nation, but who will express the odd weasel word of support for Brussels - rather than by a capitalist centre-right party which honestly seeks to exercise the democratic decision of the people (no matter how economically misguided in their minds), and is otherwise economically pretty sensible (if lacklustre and depressing).

    Anyone who is that crazy about the EU shouldn't even have the vote. They should be literally locked up in a loony bin.

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    HYUFD Posts: 37,584

    I disagree. You are again presenting your own opinion as fact, your MO. *I think* Thornberry would be one of the few candidates to unify both wings of the party while luring soft-right Remain Tories on board.

    HYUFD said:
    Thornberry would fail to win over virtually any of the current Tory voters who voted for Blair then switched to Cameron and stuck with May Labour need for a majority, nor would she inspire left-wing voter turnout behind Labour as much as Corbyn while she also has less appeal to the white working class than Corbyn does, see her St George's flag comments.

    -----------

    HYUFD makes me LOL, the way he presents his own opinion as fact, every time. What St George's flag comments? She made no comment. And, in any case, who would want to live next to house covered top to tail in England flags? So many hypocrites out there attacking Thornberry while secretly thinking "that bloke is a mug". Hypocrites!!
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 5,944
    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    Ironically by doing this, both the main political parties are looking pretty week and ineffective. Sure corbyn and labour are looking better, but their problems would start on day one..
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Lennon said:

    tpfkar said:

    I reckon this is wishful thinking.

    I saw Corbyn live on his summer marginals tour. He delivered his stump speech, finely polished by the general election campaign. I lost count of mentions of the NHS. I didn't hear a single mention of Brexit. It's peripheral to his vision and priorities, and far too complicated for him to get bogged down in.

    I wish it was true, but until Labour starts tanking in the polls with councillors defecting over Brexit, I just don't see it.

    Indeed. If anyone wants confirmation that people will vote Labour despite a Brexit positioning I suggest that they look up the GE2017 result in Vauxhall.
    Ah yes, the one where the LDs threw everything at Ms Hoey and barely made second place a long way back. I recall the story from @rcs1000 that his PA at the time lived in that constituency and voted Labour “to overturn Brexit”.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,218
    edited January 22
    Theresa May just never seems to get the tone quite right. On a Burns night dinner which is being held tonight at No 10:

    Scotland is a greatly valued part of our United Kingdom and its contribution to the UK is immense – economically, socially, and culturally.

    And Robert Burns is a great example of that, as one of our finest poets, famous world-wide.

    I’m very much looking forward to this evening and the chance to celebrate a great poet, a great nation and an enduring Union.


    "Scotland is a greatly valued part of our United Kingdom" sounds very patronising, reminiscent of a prep-school master saying a pupil is a greatly-valued member of the 2nd XI.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,479
    edited January 22
    Farage has learned from Trump how to chase ratings...
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009

    It's not just about going for what your voters want though. it's about what happens to people not voting for you currently as well. If they drive people to being more active voting against you, then it could still result in a net overall loss.

    Also, is the position itself possible? staying in the single market might be attractive to voters to start, but then the negatives would also be highlighted. It'sa fluid position in the eyes of voters.

    Any position is possible as long as you don't have to actually deliver on it. That's the supreme advantage that Labour currently has.
    Time was when we spoke of the 'bully pulpit' of government. Now we have the 'supreme advantage' of opposition. That is probably a consequence of the abject ineptitude of both party leaderships, if anything.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    Yes, sensible centrist voters are indeed poorly catered for. You are probably right that the LDs should become the party of Soft Brexit (single market) to attract such voters.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    There’s a huge market for the LDs if the drop the Remoanerism. I’d vote for a socially liberal and economically sensible party, if they accept that we’re leaving the EU and should seek to improve British influence in the world.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395

    Theresa May just never seems to get the tone quite right. On a Burns night dinner which is being held tonight at No 10:

    Scotland is a greatly valued part of our United Kingdom and its contribution to the UK is immense – economically, socially, and culturally.

    And Robert Burns is a great example of that, as one of our finest poets, famous world-wide.

    I’m very much looking forward to this evening and the chance to celebrate a great poet, a great nation and an enduring Union.


    "Scotland is a greatly valued part of our United Kingdom" sounds very patronising, reminiscent of a prep-school master saying a pupil is a greatly-valued member of the 2nd XI.

    She is, I am afraid to say, shite. Even worse, she apparently surrounds herself with terrible advisors and misguided underlings, who exacerbate her many shortcomings rather than ameliorating them.

    Corbyn is an interesting contrast. He is on paper even and considerably worse than the dire TMay (in terms of opinions, intelligence, backstory, attitude, IRA hugging etc). Yet he has managed, belatedly, to get some decent advisors and handlers who have made him look kinda remotely acceptable, if you squint a lot and drink several neat vodkas.

    Pff.



  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    kyf_100 said:

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    No, I think you are wrong. For the few remain Tories who switched to Labour, there seems to be nothing more than remaining in the EU. If it means economic suicide by Corbyn they will vote for it. So many of them are wedded to the EU, I'm personally not bothered if they ever come back to our party. Voting for Corbyn in 2017 is the ultimate betrayal of our party and tbh, they've made their bed and rate loyalty to the EU above loyalty to the party and country.
    Yes, I really cannot understand how any Tory, no matter how pro-EU, could consider voting for Corbyn, especially as Corbyn's Labour is clearly EU-ambivalent, at best.

    It means that the EU has become a religion for them, a shibboleth, and they would rather see the UK run by anti-Semitic, quasi-Islamist, Stalin-loving, bank-nationalising, IRA-sympathising, idiot Marxist ideologues, who will ruin the nation, but who will express the odd weasel word of support for Brussels - rather than by a capitalist centre-right party which honestly seeks to exercise the democratic decision of the people (no matter how economically misguided in their minds), and is otherwise economically pretty sensible (if lacklustre and depressing).

    Anyone who is that crazy about the EU shouldn't even have the vote. They should be literally locked up in a loony bin.

    I think it's more that having been betrayed by the Conservatives (as they see it) they now want to pull the house down around them.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459

    It seems rather odd for a GE2017 Labour supporter to start complaining now about Corbyn's position on Brexit; the time for that was when it could have made any difference, i.e. before and during the referendum campaign, or when considering who to vote for in GE2017.

    it might be odd - but since when could one rely on the absolute rationality of the average voter ?
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395
    Anazina said:

    HYUFD Posts: 37,584

    I disagree. You are again presenting your own opinion as fact, your MO. *I think* Thornberry would be one of the few candidates to unify both wings of the party while luring soft-right Remain Tories on board.

    HYUFD said:
    Thornberry would fail to win over virtually any of the current Tory voters who voted for Blair then switched to Cameron and stuck with May Labour need for a majority, nor would she inspire left-wing voter turnout behind Labour as much as Corbyn while she also has less appeal to the white working class than Corbyn does, see her St George's flag comments.

    -----------

    HYUFD makes me LOL, the way he presents his own opinion as fact, every time. What St George's flag comments? She made no comment. And, in any case, who would want to live next to house covered top to tail in England flags? So many hypocrites out there attacking Thornberry while secretly thinking "that bloke is a mug". Hypocrites!!

    I suggested Thornberry as a potential Labour leader and PM several years ago. Indeed I think I was one of the first on PB to do so, if not the first. OK third. Whatever.

    The point is I agree: she talks Left but she manages to look and feel centrist at the same time. She's played a clever game. She would be a dangerously effective leader of Labour and I reckon would probably lead them to victory in 2022 over most Tory candidates that I can think of now.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
  • I cannot see that Mike Smithson's analysis has any merit. Where will the Labour remainers find the "#Remain candidate" ? Many, if not most, of them have already damned the LibDems to hell for supporting the Tories in coalition, and the Greens were squeezed in the GE. It's an empty threat.

    It's like all the celebrities who said they would leave for Canada if Trump was elected. As the Guardian reported today (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/22/move-to-canada-celebrities-donald-trump) they remained in the US.

    You can make headlines with an empty threat. The celebrities did this in the US, and Mike (in a much smaller way) did in his posting. However, if the threat is implausible, it has little value.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459
    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    Quite probably no one this side of the next election.
    Certainly not Great Uncle Vince and the Invisible Democrats.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,631
    Sandpit said:

    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    There’s a huge market for the LDs if the drop the Remoanerism. I’d vote for a socially liberal and economically sensible party, if they accept that we’re leaving the EU and should seek to improve British influence in the world.
    That will never happen - certainly not until Cable is dragged away from being leader. They made a huge mistake in allowing his machinations to drive away the other candidates. He is an old man with nowhere to go. LDs deserve something better.

    Though there is a real lack of talent in their small band of MPs.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,742
    Liked this tweet:

    Ian Young‏
    @youngian67
    Replying to @MichaelLCrick
    So you can change your mind in UKIP when a democratic vote turns out to be a terrible choice in reality
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459
    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    kyf_100 said:

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    No, I think you are wrong. For the few remain Tories who switched to Labour, there seems to be nothing more than remaining in the EU. If it means economic suicide by Corbyn they will vote for it. So many of them are wedded to the EU, I'm personally not bothered if they ever come back to our party. Voting for Corbyn in 2017 is the ultimate betrayal of our party and tbh, they've made their bed and rate loyalty to the EU above loyalty to the party and country.
    Yes, I really cannot understand how any Tory, no matter how pro-EU, could consider voting for Corbyn, especially as Corbyn's Labour is clearly EU-ambivalent, at best.

    It means that the EU has become a religion for them, a shibboleth, and they would rather see the UK run by anti-Semitic, quasi-Islamist, Stalin-loving, bank-nationalising, IRA-sympathising, idiot Marxist ideologues, who will ruin the nation, but who will express the odd weasel word of support for Brussels - rather than by a capitalist centre-right party which honestly seeks to exercise the democratic decision of the people (no matter how economically misguided in their minds), and is otherwise economically pretty sensible (if lacklustre and depressing).

    Anyone who is that crazy about the EU shouldn't even have the vote. They should be literally locked up in a loony bin.

    Maybe we should impose a hyperbole test while we're at it ?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,516
    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do.

    I disagree with OGH: it is logical for the most unreconciled Remainers to hope that Labour, the main party whose base is most sympathetic to them, returns to power and to hope that the leadership is then dragged EUwards in office.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    SeanT said:

    Anazina said:

    HYUFD Posts: 37,584

    I disagree. You are again presenting your own opinion as fact, your MO. *I think* Thornberry would be one of the few candidates to unify both wings of the party while luring soft-right Remain Tories on board.

    HYUFD said:
    Thornberry would fail to win over virtually any of the current Tory voters who voted for Blair then switched to Cameron and stuck with May Labour need for a majority, nor would she inspire left-wing voter turnout behind Labour as much as Corbyn while she also has less appeal to the white working class than Corbyn does, see her St George's flag comments.

    -----------

    HYUFD makes me LOL, the way he presents his own opinion as fact, every time. What St George's flag comments? She made no comment. And, in any case, who would want to live next to house covered top to tail in England flags? So many hypocrites out there attacking Thornberry while secretly thinking "that bloke is a mug". Hypocrites!!

    I suggested Thornberry as a potential Labour leader and PM several years ago. Indeed I think I was one of the first on PB to do so, if not the first. OK third. Whatever.

    The point is I agree: she talks Left but she manages to look and feel centrist at the same time. She's played a clever game. She would be a dangerously effective leader of Labour and I reckon would probably lead them to victory in 2022 over most Tory candidates that I can think of now.
    A prescient selection. Yes, she is unique in her ability to unite both wings of the party; have a lower working class Labour-friendly upbringing while also sounding posh and middle class. Apparently she credits opera lessons and her 10-a-day Marlboro Light habit with her very TV-friendly voice. As an aside, she must be one of the few frontline politicians who admits to smoking.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Way offtopic:
    Company that makes military ejector seats admits health and safety breach for death of Red Arrows pilot in ground accident in 2011.

    The poor f***er got thrown 200’ into the air when his bang seat went off as he sat in it.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/22/ejector-seat-maker-admits-health-safety-breach-death-red-arrows/
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
    Yes, they do disagree with me. Well spotted.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
    Yes, they do disagree with me. Well spotted.
    Disagreeing with you is not a sign of close-mindedness. Rather the reverse.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,462
    Mr. F, indeed.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    @Torcuil: I see @RuthDavidsonMSP is going to Davos, to speak up for the role of women in business, politics and humanitarian work.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395
    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    MaxPB said:

    kyf_100 said:

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    No, I think you are wrong. For the few remain Tories who switched to Labour, there seems to be nothing more than remaining in the EU. If it means economic suicide by Corbyn they will vote for it. So many of them are wedded to the EU, I'm personally not bothered if they ever come back to our party. Voting for Corbyn in 2017 is the ultimate betrayal of our party and tbh, they've made their bed and rate loyalty to the EU above loyalty to the party and country.
    Yes, I really cannot understand how any Tory, no matter how pro-EU, could consider voting for Corbyn, especially as Corbyn's Labour is clearly EU-ambivalent, at best.

    It means that the EU has become a religion for them, a shibboleth, and they would rather see the UK run by anti-Semitic, quasi-Islamist, Stalin-loving, bank-nationalising, IRA-sympathising, idiot Marxist ideologues, who will ruin the nation, but who will express the odd weasel word of support for Brussels - rather than by a capitalist centre-right party which honestly seeks to exercise the democratic decision of the people (no matter how economically misguided in their minds), and is otherwise economically pretty sensible (if lacklustre and depressing).

    Anyone who is that crazy about the EU shouldn't even have the vote. They should be literally locked up in a loony bin.

    I think it's more that having been betrayed by the Conservatives (as they see it) they now want to pull the house down around them.
    Indeed: pure and genuine madness.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    Anazina said:

    It's not just about going for what your voters want though. it's about what happens to people not voting for you currently as well. If they drive people to being more active voting against you, then it could still result in a net overall loss.

    Also, is the position itself possible? staying in the single market might be attractive to voters to start, but then the negatives would also be highlighted. It'sa fluid position in the eyes of voters.

    Any position is possible as long as you don't have to actually deliver on it. That's the supreme advantage that Labour currently has.
    Time was when we spoke of the 'bully pulpit' of government. Now we have the 'supreme advantage' of opposition. That is probably a consequence of the abject ineptitude of both party leaderships, if anything.
    Both are true. Governments can set an agenda in a way that oppositions can't. That's not to say that oppositions can't be the more proactive but it requires an unpopular, defensive and frequently fractious government first. On the other hand, while oppositions can't *do* as much as governments, that very same fact means that they can hold contradictory positions far more easily and play different tunes to different audiences.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
    Yes, they do disagree with me. Well spotted.
    Disagreeing with you is not a sign of close-mindedness. Rather the reverse.
    The great divide these days is not between left and right, but between open and closed. The government is pandering to the latter. That is my point. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    More likely, I suspect.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.



    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
    Yes, they do disagree with me. Well spotted.
    Disagreeing with you is not a sign of close-mindedness. Rather the reverse.
    The great divide these days is not between left and right, but between open and closed. The government is pandering to the latter. That is my point. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial.
    Your point is that people who agree with you are open, people who disagree with you are closed. I don't think that is a well-founded argument.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do.

    I disagree with OGH: it is logical for the most unreconciled Remainers to hope that Labour, the main party whose base is most sympathetic to them, returns to power and to hope that the leadership is then dragged EUwards in office.

    It may be logical but it is also naive.

    Everything that Corbyn has done since the election shows that he has no intention of staying in the Single Market or Customs Union. I do not see on what basis people think that he will be dragged EUwards were he in office.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 3,390
    Sandpit said:

    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    There’s a huge market for the LDs if the drop the Remoanerism. I’d vote for a socially liberal and economically sensible party, if they accept that we’re leaving the EU and should seek to improve British influence in the world.
    They've been very pro "Europe" all the way back to Jo Grimond I believe. It's been their USP for decades and decades, and something that distinguished them from the big two, both of whom have gone through various waxing and waning levels of scepticism over the years. I'm sure it was a sincerely held position for the majority of them, hence it must've been a particularly painful wrench when 52% of the voters decided that route had been the wrong one.

    Now they can campaign for a second vote, or rejoining or whatever, it's a free country, but Vince and Clegg et al do rather remind me of Jesuits wandering the shires of Elizabethan England clutching their rosaries bewailing the loss of the old religion. Old Queen Bess Soft Brexited by solidifying the C of E as a just about Protestant Church but with just enough smells and bells to keep the old timers on board. I'm sure many an ex Catholic quietly made their peace rather than holding out and ending up in the Tower (in those days). Vince might learn a thing from that.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,631
    20 minutes and counting for Bolton
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,459

    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do....

    And what about Brexit plus Corbyn ?
    (Which seems an entirely possible outcome.)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    Cyclefree said:

    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do.

    I disagree with OGH: it is logical for the most unreconciled Remainers to hope that Labour, the main party whose base is most sympathetic to them, returns to power and to hope that the leadership is then dragged EUwards in office.

    It may be logical but it is also naive.

    Everything that Corbyn has done since the election shows that he has no intention of staying in the Single Market or Customs Union. I do not see on what basis people think that he will be dragged EUwards were he in office.
    Indeed, if anything Corbyn getting into power would be him telling those EUfanatics to get lost because it's his mandate, not Chuka's. His ideas will have won the day, not theirs.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,135
    Cyclefree said:

    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do.

    I disagree with OGH: it is logical for the most unreconciled Remainers to hope that Labour, the main party whose base is most sympathetic to them, returns to power and to hope that the leadership is then dragged EUwards in office.

    It may be logical but it is also naive.

    Everything that Corbyn has done since the election shows that he has no intention of staying in the Single Market or Customs Union. I do not see on what basis people think that he will be dragged EUwards were he in office.
    If you take the view that there is no calamity worse than Brexit, then I suppose it makes sense to vote Labour, in the hope that it will be reversed, rather than Conservative, in the certain knowledge that it won't be.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    Sean_F said:

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed that. Even I've been surprised by how vociferous their support of the EU has been.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    Cyclefree said:

    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do.

    I disagree with OGH: it is logical for the most unreconciled Remainers to hope that Labour, the main party whose base is most sympathetic to them, returns to power and to hope that the leadership is then dragged EUwards in office.

    It may be logical but it is also naive.

    Everything that Corbyn has done since the election shows that he has no intention of staying in the Single Market or Customs Union. I do not see on what basis people think that he will be dragged EUwards were he in office.
    It's delusion: they see what they want to see, because they really, really want to see it.

    Indeed, it's not impossible that Corbyn could take the UK *further* out of the EU, in order to implement policies that discriminate in favour of British firms, if May ends up being forced into a very soft Brexit by the logic of the Irish border.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009

    Anazina said:

    It's not just about going for what your voters want though. it's about what happens to people not voting for you currently as well. If they drive people to being more active voting against you, then it could still result in a net overall loss.

    Also, is the position itself possible? staying in the single market might be attractive to voters to start, but then the negatives would also be highlighted. It'sa fluid position in the eyes of voters.

    Any position is possible as long as you don't have to actually deliver on it. That's the supreme advantage that Labour currently has.
    Time was when we spoke of the 'bully pulpit' of government. Now we have the 'supreme advantage' of opposition. That is probably a consequence of the abject ineptitude of both party leaderships, if anything.
    Both are true. Governments can set an agenda in a way that oppositions can't. That's not to say that oppositions can't be the more proactive but it requires an unpopular, defensive and frequently fractious government first. On the other hand, while oppositions can't *do* as much as governments, that very same fact means that they can hold contradictory positions far more easily and play different tunes to different audiences.
    Agreed. Indeed I would argue that the current Opposition has an opportunity to be more proactive (because the government is indeed unpopular, defensive and frequently fractious) but the big divide in the Labour Party prevents it.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    kyf_100 said:

    Labour have reached a hard ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for a far left candidate who is surrounded by a cabal of Marxists like Seamus Milne, etc.

    FWIW I think the current Conservative administration is dire, May is a ditherer and her cabinet are yet to show signs of competence. However, the other lot are worse. Either incompetent, reckless or outright dangerous.

    Given the general paucity of talent in the government at the moment combined with May's unpleasant authoritarian streak I could see myself abstaining (or even, shock horror, voting Lib Dem in protest, if they weren't so obsessed with Brexit) if Labour fielded a more moderate candidate.

    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    Posted without comment: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/20/jewish-labour-group-accuses-failing-act-antisemitism.

    There is a related article about Haringey and Labour in yesterday's Sunday Times. Some of the comments reported there are worrying in their implications.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:



    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
    Yes, they do disagree with me. Well spotted.
    Disagreeing with you is not a sign of close-mindedness. Rather the reverse.
    The great divide these days is not between left and right, but between open and closed. The government is pandering to the latter. That is my point. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial.
    A great many of us voted to leave the EU in order to be more open to the world, as opposed to be closed to EU protectionist policies.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910
    Off topic: Is the Times subscription worth it? Am finally considering it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    edited January 22
    While I agree with @MaxPB on this - Brexit is a Cons issue - where I think Lab could pick up votes is by reinforcing themselves as the non-nasty party in an environment wherein Brexit is perceived as nasty.

    Or, as @Anazina notes, as closed.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed that. Even I've been surprised by how vociferous their support of the EU has been.
    It was never that vociferous before/during the Referendum campaign. Probably because they knew how small a minority that would put them in.

    And how likely it was to rile the average voter.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 9,910

    Cyclefree said:

    The Brexit cultists can't understand that many regard Brexit as being at least as damaging to the country as anything Jeremy Corbyn might do.

    I disagree with OGH: it is logical for the most unreconciled Remainers to hope that Labour, the main party whose base is most sympathetic to them, returns to power and to hope that the leadership is then dragged EUwards in office.

    It may be logical but it is also naive.

    Everything that Corbyn has done since the election shows that he has no intention of staying in the Single Market or Customs Union. I do not see on what basis people think that he will be dragged EUwards were he in office.
    It's delusion: they see what they want to see, because they really, really want to see it.

    Indeed, it's not impossible that Corbyn could take the UK *further* out of the EU, in order to implement policies that discriminate in favour of British firms, if May ends up being forced into a very soft Brexit by the logic of the Irish border.
    But won't the logic of the Irish border work in exactly the same way for a Labour government?

    Unless they intend getting rid of Northern Ireland altogether, against the consent of its people. Which is not something the Irish republic would want.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    Cyclefree said:

    Off topic: Is the Times subscription worth it? Am finally considering it.

    There's a pretty cheap taster offer usually available, I think. Last time I subscribed the android tablet edition was utterly lame, so I stopped, but it may have improved or you may be an appleite.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,744
    Cyclefree said:

    Off topic: Is the Times subscription worth it? Am finally considering it.

    I don't subscribe, but the luxury of stretching out with a copy of the Times over either a cup of coffee or a gin, reading the Letters page first, then the obits, then the news pages, then Times2 - is a very pleasant one.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,980
    By Labour trying to sit on the fence over Brext they are trying to attract voters from both sides.

    They have not so far driven their Remain supporters to the Lib Dems by voting for Article 50 for example.

    The Remain supporters either don't care enough about Brexit to worry or have not yet understood Labour's position.

    I suspect most 'remainers' don't care much about Brexit or at least are not as passionate as 'leavers'.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 3,339
    edited January 22
    Who are these mysterious Corbyn-voting pro-european Tories that have been summoned up on this thread? I've never encountered one. Are they a bit like the Yeti?
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 883
    welshowl said:

    Sandpit said:

    SeanT said:

    Right now I would probably vote Lib Dem if they would willingly and keenly accept a Soft Brexit. People like Clegg, blatantly trying to reverse it, do untold damage to the cause.

    That's how crap TMay is, and how awful and dangerous Corbyn's Labour have become. I would prefer the LDs (Brexit aside).

    A huge hole is opening in the centre of British politics. Who will fill it?

    There’s a huge market for the LDs if the drop the Remoanerism. I’d vote for a socially liberal and economically sensible party, if they accept that we’re leaving the EU and should seek to improve British influence in the world.
    They've been very pro "Europe" all the way back to Jo Grimond I believe. It's been their USP for decades and decades, and something that distinguished them from the big two, both of whom have gone through various waxing and waning levels of scepticism over the years. I'm sure it was a sincerely held position for the majority of them, hence it must've been a particularly painful wrench when 52% of the voters decided that route had been the wrong one.

    Now they can campaign for a second vote, or rejoining or whatever, it's a free country, but Vince and Clegg et al do rather remind me of Jesuits wandering the shires of Elizabethan England clutching their rosaries bewailing the loss of the old religion. Old Queen Bess Soft Brexited by solidifying the C of E as a just about Protestant Church but with just enough smells and bells to keep the old timers on board. I'm sure many an ex Catholic quietly made their peace rather than holding out and ending up in the Tower (in those days). Vince might learn a thing from that.
    That's a good comparison. Sadly the Lib Dem membership would shout 'Betrayal' at pivoting for a Soft Brexit right now. I guess that the best hope for this direction is that once the timing simply becomes too late to hold that terms referendum before leaving (September perhaps?) then it does become the obvious direction of travel.

    The real question will be whether the membership agitates for 'Rejoin' once we've left - that would be dangerous as it's too easy to attack that it would mean Euro, Schengen, Euro army etc. Nonsense, but the sort of nonsense that's already won one referendum. My view would be that living with soft Brexit and moving to priorities of housing, health environment and education would be the smarter move at that point.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,824
    Go Crobyn...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    IanB2 said:

    Go Crobyn...

    Crow bin?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,694
    edited January 22
    Cyclefree said:

    Off topic: Is the Times subscription worth it? Am finally considering it.

    Well the Telegraph have finally managed to secure their paywall over the last few days, and given what that rag has become the Times subscription might end up being worthwhile.

    Shame they don’t really understand overseas subscriptions and the various payment methods that the rest of the world uses.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    The commentators thus far have missed an obvious reason for those unhappy bout Brexit to vote Labour

    May is completely incompetent. Whatever she touches turns to dust. Even Corbyn is not as useless as May.

    A Brexit delivered by Kier Starmer looks much more attractive than a Brexit delivered by BoZo and chums.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,607
    Has Bolton resigned yet?
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395
    Anazina said:

    SeanT said:

    Anazina said:

    HYUFD Posts: 37,584

    I disagree. You are again presenting your own opinion as fact, your MO. *I think* Thornberry would be one of the few candidates to unify both wings of the party while luring soft-right Remain Tories on board.

    HYUFD said:
    Thornberry would fail to win over virtually any of the current Tory voters who voted for Blair then switched to Cameron and stuck with May Labour need for a majority, nor would she inspire left-wing voter turnout behind Labour as much as Corbyn while she also has less appeal to the white working class than Corbyn does, see her St George's flag comments.

    -----------

    HYUFD makes me LOL, the way he presents his own opinion as fact, every time. What St George's flag comments? She made no comment. And, in any case, who would want to live next to house covered top to tail in England flags? So many hypocrites out there attacking Thornberry while secretly thinking "that bloke is a mug". Hypocrites!!

    I suggested Thornberry as a potential Labour leader and PM several years ago. Indeed I think I was one of the first on PB to do so, if not the first. OK third. Whatever.

    The point is I agree: she talks Left but she manages to look and feel centrist at the same time. She's played a clever game. She would be a dangerously effective leader of Labour and I reckon would probably lead them to victory in 2022 over most Tory candidates that I can think of now.
    A prescient selection. Yes, she is unique in her ability to unite both wings of the party; have a lower working class Labour-friendly upbringing while also sounding posh and middle class. Apparently she credits opera lessons and her 10-a-day Marlboro Light habit with her very TV-friendly voice. As an aside, she must be one of the few frontline politicians who admits to smoking.
    She also sounds vaguely competent, smart and vigorous. Which, when the present choice is TMay or JCorbyn or VCable is not unappealing. I suspect she is much more Blairy than she lets on (very sensible right now: staying quiet). I despise some of her PC beliefs, but I don't think she's a Stalinist that would bankrupt the country.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    ‘Oh no! Not another one! I can’t stand it!’

    Brenda, quoted by the Daily Mail in April 2017, on the General Election. There is too much patronising commentary on here as to how much "normal" people attend to the minutiae of politics, but if that was the reaction to having another GE in 2017 after 2015, despite the many and obvious changes in the interim (Brexit, Camexit), who really thinks that the public regards Brexit as a live, revisitable issue? It is dead, nailed to its perch, defunct, receipted and filed. In GE 17 the electorate in fact gave a very different answer to their previous one, so perhaps they subconsciously wanted one all along, but the difference is the heavy lifting required to get to where you ask the question; it's not a one batty woman on a walking holiday decision.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,061
    For a minority, Brexit/Remain defines their political ideology.

    For the rest of us, it is one issue, but our political ideology - be it Socialism, Liberalism, Conservatism or whatever - is over-riding and determines where we will cast our ballots. If Labour advocated Remain or Rejoin, that wouldn't turn me away from Labour. I am not defined by my position on the UK's membership of the EU.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,009
    Sandpit said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    Sean_F said:

    Anazina said:

    kyf_100 said:



    But so long as Corbyn remains in place, or his successor looks likely to be equally as extreme, the Conservatives could put up literally any candidate regardless of experience or talent and I would still vote for them. It's not about Brexit for me. It's about a genuine fear of a far left, anti capitalist, anti semitic government of extremists doing untold damage to the country.

    Labour are doing well to get to 40% in the polls. But there is a ceiling on the number of people willing to vote for socialism. It is a cliche to say that elections are won from the centre ground, particularly in these polarising times. But Corbyn is a marmite candidate. And simply put, not enough people love him to put him over the finishing line.

    GE2017 was a "free hit" because Corbyn never looked like getting into power. But even the most remainiest of remain liberal Conservatives will end up voting in their economic self interest once the true cost of Labour's radical manifesto is made clear.

    There economic self interest might not be with the Tories if May and her deluded band of blundering provincial amateurs continue down their path of pandering to the dullards of Mansfield at the expense of the successful, open-minded areas of the UK, such as London.
    Why do you believe the inhabitants of Mansfield to be "dullards?"
    Not all of them by any means, but my point was that the government is pandering to close-minded thinking.
    You mean, to people who disagree with you?
    Yes, they do disagree with me. Well spotted.
    Disagreeing with you is not a sign of close-mindedness. Rather the reverse.
    The great divide these days is not between left and right, but between open and closed. The government is pandering to the latter. That is my point. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial.
    A great many of us voted to leave the EU in order to be more open to the world, as opposed to be closed to EU protectionist policies.
    There is a small chunk of brexiteers who are like you, granted. But they are a small slice. Survey after survey shows most to be typical close-minded types, harking back to an age long since gone.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,824

    By Labour trying to sit on the fence over Brext they are trying to attract voters from both sides.

    They have not so far driven their Remain supporters to the Lib Dems by voting for Article 50 for example.

    The Remain supporters either don't care enough about Brexit to worry or have not yet understood Labour's position.

    I suspect most 'remainers' don't care much about Brexit or at least are not as passionate as 'leavers'.

    Most of them will have voted for fear of the damage of Brexit, rather than from the ideological pro-European position of the LibDems. Whether or not Brexit will seem, to most voters, to be damaging, when it happens, remains to be seen. If it does, politics could change quite dramatically.
  • RWPRWP Posts: 5
    If Mike is right (and I disagree with him, for once, here) then where are the pro-Lab Remain voters, who would otherwise fall into the Lab column but for their Remain sympathies, hiding?
    Surely not with Ukip or the Tories, by definition. The LD vote isn't any higher now than in 2011-17, so we can rule that out. The other parties are so small that it makes little difference if you add a few of their voters into the Lab column.

    I think Lab at 40-ish % is at something of a ceiling - not sure where the absent Remainers are?!?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 14,237
    Cyclefree said:

    Off topic: Is the Times subscription worth it? Am finally considering it.

    Yes, absolutely. They are talking about the issues nobody else wants to.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3cf5b170-fe19-11e7-ba61-5366488da64d

    You'll only get to see the title until you subscribe though.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,824

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed that. Even I've been surprised by how vociferous their support of the EU has been.
    It was never that vociferous before/during the Referendum campaign. Probably because they knew how small a minority that would put them in.

    And how likely it was to rile the average voter.
    I suspect your view is coloured by being based in the west county. In most of the South, and indeed much of London, it was LibDem activists who carried the Remain ground campaign, such as it was.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed that. Even I've been surprised by how vociferous their support of the EU has been.
    It was never that vociferous before/during the Referendum campaign. Probably because they knew how small a minority that would put them in.

    And how likely it was to rile the average voter.
    I suspect your view is coloured by being based in the west county. In most of the South, and indeed much of London, it was LibDem activists who carried the Remain ground campaign, such as it was.
    To be brutally honest, I'm not sure the ground campaign had any impact during the referendum.

    I spotted one solitary 'Labour Remain' chap leafleting in my local high street. Sat in a nearby coffee shop I saw him get short shrift from pretty much everyone.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 20,395
    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed that. Even I've been surprised by how vociferous their support of the EU has been.
    It was never that vociferous before/during the Referendum campaign. Probably because they knew how small a minority that would put them in.

    And how likely it was to rile the average voter.
    I suspect your view is coloured by being based in the west county. In most of the South, and indeed much of London, it was LibDem activists who carried the Remain ground campaign, such as it was.
    The only places I still see sad, old, peeling Vote Remain posters are the poshest parts of Lib Dem voting southwest London.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,854
    @JoeWatts_: Ukip's Henry Bolton: "I respect the next steps in the constitutional process and will therefore not be resigning as Party leader. I repeat I shall not be resigning as Party leader."
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    reuters reporting bolton says not resigning (per Sky).
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 4,980
    Attlee was an army major in the First World War.

    What rank would Corbyn be? I suspect Corporal.

    But army corporals can be dangerous in politics, or at least German ones can be.

  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,688
    SeanT said:

    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    Possible, but it's also possible that this has worked nicely in Labour's favour. Corbyn keeps the sceptics aboard, the Party's generally pro-EU stance keeps the eurosausage enthusiasts happy.

    I think it works out very well for them. The euro-sausage enthusiasts only want revenge on the Conservatives. They'd vote for Pol Pot if they thought they'd get that revenge.
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed that. Even I've been surprised by how vociferous their support of the EU has been.
    It was never that vociferous before/during the Referendum campaign. Probably because they knew how small a minority that would put them in.

    And how likely it was to rile the average voter.
    I suspect your view is coloured by being based in the west county. In most of the South, and indeed much of London, it was LibDem activists who carried the Remain ground campaign, such as it was.
    The only places I still see sad, old, peeling Vote Remain posters are the poshest parts of Lib Dem voting southwest London.
    I've seen way more Remain posters since 23rd June 2016.

    And by posters, I mean pieces of paper, not williamglenns.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    Making statement now. https://news.sky.com/watch-live
This discussion has been closed.